Kirby Institute

About: Kirby Institute is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Men who have sex with men. The organization has 570 authors who have published 1216 publications receiving 21002 citations. The organization is also known as: The Kirby Institute for infection and immunity in society & Kirby Institute for infection and immunity in society.

A 'scoping review' of qualitative literature about engagement with HIV care in Indonesia.

Abstract: Background The Indonesian response to HIV has been informed largely by quantitative evidence. This review examines what is known about the Indonesian HIV care cascade from published qualitative research. Methods: A ‘scoping review’ method was used to synthesise and interpret the findings of 17 eligible peer-reviewed publications. Results: Qualitative findings are reported in relation to two themes. Factors influencing successful engagement include a lack of HIV-related knowledge among clients, fear of stigma or lack of privacy/confidentiality at services, limited accessibility and affordability, and poor linkages between services. Factors affecting the broader response include a failure to adapt programs to specific socio-cultural settings, political issues in the distribution of donor funding, distrust and poor communication between service users and providers, the need for cultural privacy in particular community settings, and systemic experiences of gendered stigmatisation. Conclusions: Enhancing understanding of the Indonesian context would benefit from future qualitative research on HIV care in urban settings, describing the experiences of the most at-risk populations, and examining the role of clinics and providers in delivering HIV care in an increasingly decentralised health system.

Airborne or droplet precautions for health workers treating COVID-19?

Abstract: Cases of COVID-19 have been reported in over 200 countries. Thousands of health workers have been infected and outbreaks have occurred in hospitals, aged care facilities and prisons. World Health Organization (WHO) has issued guidelines for contact and droplet precautions for Healthcare Workers (HCWs) caring for suspected COVID-19 patients, whilst the US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) has recommended airborne precautions. The 1 - 2 m (≈3 - 6 ft) rule of spatial separation is central to droplet precautions and assumes large droplets do not travel further than 2 m (≈6 ft). We aimed to review the evidence for horizontal distance travelled by droplets and the guidelines issued by the World Health Organization (WHO), US Center for Diseases Control (CDC) and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) on respiratory protection for COVID-19. We found that the evidence base for current guidelines is sparse, and the available data do not support the 1 - 2 m (≈3 - 6 ft) rule of spatial separation. Of ten studies on horizontal droplet distance, eight showed droplets travel more than 2 m (≈6 ft), in some cases more than 8 meters (≈26 ft). Several studies of SARS-CoV-2 support aerosol transmission and one study documented virus at a distance of 4 meters (≈13 ft) from the patient. Moreover, evidence suggests infections cannot neatly be separated into the dichotomy of droplet versus airborne transmission routes. Available studies also show that SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in the air, 3 hours after aeroslisation. The weight of combined evidence supports airborne precautions for the occupational health and safety of health workers treating patients with COVID-19.

Reduction of secondary transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in households by face mask use, disinfection and social distancing: a cohort study in Beijing, China.

Abstract: Introduction Transmission of COVID-19 within families and close contacts accounts for the majority of epidemic growth. Community mask wearing, hand washing and social distancing are thought to be effective but there is little evidence to inform or support community members on COVID-19 risk reduction within families. Methods A retrospective cohort study of 335 people in 124 families and with at least one laboratory confirmed COVID-19 case was conducted from 28 February to 27 March 2020, in Beijing, China. The outcome of interest was secondary transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within the family. Characteristics and practices of primary cases, of well family contacts and household hygiene practices were analysed as predictors of secondary transmission. Results The secondary attack rate in families was 23.0% (77/335). Face mask use by the primary case and family contacts before the primary case developed symptoms was 79% effective in reducing transmission (OR=0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.79). Daily use of chlorine or ethanol based disinfectant in households was 77% effective (OR=0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.84). Wearing a mask after illness onset of the primary case was not significantly protective. The risk of household transmission was 18 times higher with frequent daily close contact with the primary case (OR=18.26, 95% CI 3.93 to 84.79), and four times higher if the primary case had diarrhoea (OR=4.10, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.60). Household crowding was not significant. Conclusion The study confirms the highest risk of transmission prior to symptom onset, and provides the first evidence of the effectiveness of mask use, disinfection and social distancing in preventing COVID-19. We also found evidence of faecal transmission. This can inform guidelines for community prevention in settings of intense COVID-19 epidemics.